Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Fortunately for us, they don't allow the Phoeix into high-sec - so we're good to go.

At this point the only people who seem to have not foreseen that these changes would make virtually everyone stop using rapid launchers are the people making all the decisions. Not a good sign...

1. The average caldari pilot, solo:

Highs
slots 1-5
-5 launcher/turrets

Mediums
slots 1-5
1. Prop mod,
2. Scram
3. Target painter ( launchers, to hit ****)
4. web (to apply damage to anything moving faster than 5 m/s, in the case of missiles)
5. Shield module, lse or adaptive <-------Sole defense

Lows
slots 1-4
1. Damage control
2.Ballistic control unit
3. 2nd bcu
4. 3rd bcu <---------------Despite 3 damage mods, missiles still do over 100 dps less than turrets with meta 4's

Rigs 1-3
1.shield extender
2. shield extender or rigor
3.flare catalyst

---------------> outcome, 20k less tank/ over 100 dps less, compared to every other races cruiser.


2. Caldari cruiser pilot, fleet with logistical support and takle (Ospreys for shield reps, Bellicose or vigils for target painting etc.)

Highs 1-5
-5 launchers/turrets
Midslots 1-5
1. Adaptive invul II
2. Adaptive invul II
3. Large Shield Extender II
4. Large Shield Extender II
5. MWD or AB.

Lowslots 1-4
1....
2....
3.....Ballistic control unit II
4. Damage control II

Outcome----------> Proper tank, still 100 dps less than every other racial cruiser. Relies solely on frigates for point, tp ships to do damage to anything. With Hams of course. Heavy Missiles are out of the question.

Hey guys. As I'm sure you know, we're keeping an eye on how people are using the new Rapid Launchers, watching how people adapt to the new strengths and weaknesses of them and keeping a close eye on the metrics surrounding them. We're also getting some good experience flying with them on our own player characters in a live environment. Rest assured that we're not ignoring these modules.

As a quick tidbit of metrics for you: Over the last week the number of characters using RLMLs each day was 6.5% lower than the pre-Rubicon average. We were actually expecting the decrease to be a bit more significant at this point, and this easily falls within acceptable ranges.

Thanks as always for the continued feedback!

It wouldn't be so pathetic if it weren't true… I'm pretty sure even standard light launchers out-DPS the rapids simply due to increased capacity.

Translation: Write post in notepad, copy paste to forums. Grab a handful of chips and drink Icelandisch soda.

I don't get any sense of a reply out of this, although it is something it doesn't relate to "this thread"

Edit: I can get not wanting to read this thread all day, can we get some kind of CSM reply/relay??

Please Fraps it and upload to Youtube (or it didn't happen). Thank you.

Certainly it's always been a truism that turrets are better than missiles in fleet environments, and become more better as gang size increases. But I think we all know that that won't be solved without the flight time issue being reduced to the point where missiles aren't actually missiles at all. A lowslot missile tracking/speed enhancer would certainly help mitigate the issue though.

Also, yes, on the brawling scale there are good turret options too. Someone above mentioned the Tornado and Talos as being better choice than a Drake, but the comparison between brawlers and skirmishers isn't very useful. The Brutix was a better comparison, at least with short range fits - there's no way I'm defending HMs these days! However, shield Brutix can lack tackle and is distinctly on the fragile side (invoked to criticise HAM Drake), armour buffer Brutix is painfully slow with trimarks (also invoked to criticise HAM Drake) and similarly flimsy without, while active armour Brutix is rather niche. So I still feel that HAM Drake offers a good mix of tank, damage projection and mobility for a combat BC in a solo or small gang environment. If you're not flying in those environments, then don't use it - I certainly don't in WH fights!

Re. HAM/HML damage application. Well, everyone knows that HMs are out of whack, no further comment needed there! I feel you're too harsh on HAMs though. Your example of a MWDing Stabber is deliberately extreme, something like a Thorax or Rupture would be better (and more representative of the game than the unpopular Stabber?), and there your 25-40% damage application figure quoted are overly pessimistic. It's 71% against an unwebbed MWDing nano shield Thorax, for example, and more against a shield nano Rupture.

This does not mean anything.

Is sov fun ? No.
Yet, are people still grinding sov ? Yes.

There are no 36 solutions when you want to be in a cruiser and hit frigates, so people will continue to use RLMLs anyway as long as they do more damage than heavy missiles on frigates...
So your point is irrelevant in terms of game design and game balance.

For the game balance part, this rebalance just made the problem worse with RLMLs even more efficient on frigates and even less efficient on everything else.

In terms of game design, this rebalance is crap due to the reload time being too long. Creating inactivity and uselesness in the middle of a fight. This is counpounded by the fact that you cannot see the time remaining for the reload, and that you cannot switch ammo fast enough to use missiles how they were designed to be used.

So, stop trying to contain the crowd just by throwing metrics that we have no way to verify into the air. Thank you.

If you mean heavy missiles then I don't think metrics can be ignored, but they will be skewed by pve unless they have some way to isolate pve from pvp usage the missile metrics will always appear to be healthy. Someone posted a link to usage stats earlier and missiles were hardly featured at all in the top 20 weapon systems, so I'm not sure what metric was used to determine RLML was OP in the first place